The nature of civilization. Bedouin
and settled life, the achievement of superiority,
gainful occupations, ways of making a living, sciences,
crafts, and all the other things that affect(civilization). The causes
and reasons thereof.

IT1 SHOULD be known that
history, in matter of fact, is information
about human social organization, which itself is identical with world civilization.
It deals with such conditions affecting the nature of civilization as,
for instance, savagery and sociability, group feelings, and the
different ways by which one group of human beings achieves
superiority over another It deals with royal authority and the dynasties that result (in this manner) and
with the various ranks that exist within them. (It further deals) with
the different kinds of gainful occupations and ways of making a living,
with the sciences and crafts that human beings pursue as part of their
activities and efforts, and with all the other institutions that
originate in civilization through its very nature.

Untruth naturally afflicts historical information. There are various
reasons that make this unavoidable. One of them is partisanship for
opinions and schools. If the soul is impartial in receiving
information, it devotes to that information the share of critical
investigation the information deserves, and its truth or untruth thus
becomes clear. However, if the soul is infected with partisanship for a
particular opinion or sect, it accepts without a moment's hesitation the
information that is agreeable to it. Prejudice and partisanship obscure
the critical faculty and preclude critical investigation. The result is
that falsehoods are accepted and transmitted.

Another
reason making untruth unavoidable in historical information is
reliance upon transmitters. Investigation of this subject belongs to
(the theological discipline of) personality criticism.2

Another reason is
unawareness of the purpose of an event. Many a transmitter does not know
the real significance of his observations or of the things he has
learned about orally. He transmits the information, attributing to it
the significance he assumes or imagines it to have. The result is
falsehood.

Another reason is
unfounded assumption as to the truth of a thing. This is frequent. It
results mostly from reliance upon transmitters.

Another reason is
ignorance of how conditions conform with reality. 2a Conditions are
affected by ambiguities and artificial distortions. The informant
reports the conditions as he saw them but on account of artificial
distortions he himself has no true picture of them.

Another reason is
the fact that people as a rule approach great and high-ranking persons
with praise and encomiums. They embellish conditions and spread the fame
(of great men). The information made public in such cases is not
truthful. Human souls long for praise, and people pay great attention
to this world and the positions and wealth it offers. As a rule, they
feel no desire for virtue and have no special interest in virtuous
people.

Another reason
making untruth unavoidable - and this one is more powerful than all the
reasons previously mentioned is ignorance of the nature of the various
conditions arising in civilization. Every event (or phenomenon), whether
(it comes into being in connection with some) essence or (as the result
of an) action, must inevitably possess a nature peculiar
to its essence as well as to the accidental conditions that may attach
themselves to it. If the student knows the nature of events and the
circumstances and requirements in the world of
existence, it will help him to distinguish truth from untruth in
investigating the historical information critically. This is more
effective in critical investigation than any other aspect that may be
brought up in connection with it.

Students often
happen to accept and transmit absurd information that, in turn, is
believed on their authority. Al­Mas'udi,3 for instance,
reports such a story about Alexander. Sea monsters prevented Alexander
from building Alexandria. He took a wooden container in which a glass
box was inserted, and dived in it to the bottom of the sea. There he
drew pictures of the devilish monsters he saw. He then had metal
effigies of these animals made and set them up opposite the place where
building was going on. When the monsters came out and saw the effigies,
they fled. Alexander was thus able to complete the building of
Alexandria.

It is a long
story, made up of nonsensical elements which are absurd for
various reasons. Thus, (Alexander is said) to have taken a glass box and
braved the sea and its waves in person. Now, rulers would not take such
a risk .4Any ruler who would attempt such a thing would work
his own undoing and provoke the outbreak of revolt against himself, and
(he would) be replaced by the people with someone else. That would be
his end. People would not (even) wait one moment for him to return from
the (dangerous) risk he is taking.

Furthermore, the
jinn are not known to have specific forms and effigies. They are able to
take on various forms. The story of the many heads they have is intended
to indicate ugliness and frightfulness. It is not meant to be taken
literally.

All this throws
suspicion upon the story. Yet, the element in it that
makes the story absurd for reasons based on the facts
of existence is more convincing than all the other (arguments). Were
one to go down deep into the water, even in a box, one would have too
little air for natural breathing. Because of that, one's spirit5 would
quickly become hot. Such a man would lack the cold air necessary to
maintain a well-balanced humor of the lung and the vital spirit. He
would perish on the spot. This is the reason why people perish in hot
baths when cold air is denied to them. It also is the reason why people
who go down into deep wells and dungeons perish when the air there
becomes hot through putrefaction, and no winds enter those places to
stir the air up. Those who go down there perish immediately. This also
is the reason why fish die when they leave the water, for the air is not
sufficient for (a fish) to balance its lung. (The fish) is extremely
hot, and the water to balance it's humor is cold. The air into which (the fish) now comes is hot. Heat, thus, gains power over its
animal spirit, and it perishes at once. This also is the reason for
sudden death,6 and similar things.

Al-Mas'udi
reports another absurd story, that of the Statue of the Starling in Rome7 Ona fixed day of the year, starlings gather at that statue
bringing olives from which the inhabitants of Rome get their oil. How
little this has to do with the natural procedure of getting oil!

Another absurd
story is reported by al-Bakri. It concerns the way the so-called "Gate
City" was built.8
That city had a circumference of
more than a thirty days' journey and had ten thousand gates. Now, cities
are used for security and protection, as will be mentioned.9 Such a
city, however, could not be controlled and would offer no security or
protection.

Then, there is
also al-Mas'udi's story of the "Copper City." 10This is
said to be a city built wholly of copper in the desert of Sijilmasah
which Musa b. Nusayr 11crossed on
his raid against the Maghrib. The gates of (the Copper City) are said to
be closed. When the person who climbs the walls of the city in order to
enter it, reaches the top, he claps his hand and throws himself down and
never returns. All this is an absurd story. It belongs to the idle talk
of storytellers. The desert of Sijilmasah has been crossed by travelers
and guides. They have not come across any information about such a
city.12 All the details mentioned about it are absurd, (if compared
with) the customary state of affairs. They con­tradict the natural facts
that apply to the building and planning of cities. Metal exists at best
in quantities sufficient for utensils and furnishings. It is clearly
absurd and unlikely that there would be enough to cover a city with it.

There 13are
many similar things. Only knowledge of the nature of civilization makes
critical investigation of them possible. It is the best and most
reliable way to investigate historical information critically and to
distinguish truth and falsehood in it. It is superior to investigations
that rely upon criticism of the personalities of transmitters. Such
personality criticism should not be resorted to until it has been
ascertained whether a specific piece of information is in itself
possible, or not. If it is absurd, there is no use engaging in
personality criticism. Critical scholars consider absurdity inherent in
the literal meaning of historical information, or an interpretation not
acceptable to the intellect, as something that makes such information
suspect. Personality criticism is taken into consideration only in
connection with the soundness (or lack of soundness) of Muslim
religious information, because this
religious information mostly concerns injunctions in accordance with
which the Lawgiver (Muhammad) enjoined Muslims to act whenever it can be
presumed that the information is genuine. The way to achieve presumptive
soundness is to ascertain the probity (`adalah) and exactness of
the transmitters.

On the other
hand, to establish the truth and soundness of information about factual
happenings, a requirement to consider is the conformity (or lack of
conformity of the reported information with general conditions).
Therefore, it is necessary to investigate whether it is possible that
the (reported facts) could have happened. This is more important than,
and has priority over, personality criticism. For the correct notion
about something that ought to be14can be derived only from
(personality criticism), while the correct notion about something that
was can be derived from (personality criticism) and external (evidence)
by (checking) the conformity (of the historical report with general
conditions).

If 15this is so,
the normative method for distinguishing right from wrong in historical
information on the grounds of (inherent) possibility or absurdity, is to
investigate human social organization, which is identical with
civilization. We must distinguish the conditions that attach themselves
to the essence of civilization as required by its very nature; the
things that are accidental (to civilization) and cannot be counted on;
and the things that cannot possibly attach themselves to it. If we do
that, we shall have a normative method for distinguishing right from
wrong and truth from falsehood in historical information by means of a
logical demonstration that admits of no doubts.
Then whenever
we hear about certain conditions occurring in civilization, we shall
know what to accept and what to declare spurious. We shall have a sound
yardstick with the help of which historians may find the path of truth
and correctness where their reports are concerned.

Such 16is the
purpose of this first book of our work. (The subject) is in a way an
independent science. (This science) has its own peculiar object-that is,
human civilization and social organization. It also has its own peculiar
problems, that is, explaining the conditions that attach themselves to
the essence of civilization, one after the other. Thus, the situation is
the same with this science as it is with any other science, whether
it be a conventional 17or an
intellectual one.

It should be
known that the discussion of this topic is something new, extraordinary,
and highly useful. Penetrating research
has shown the way to it. It does not belong to rhetoric, one of the
logical disciplines (represented in Aristotle's Organon), the subject of
which is convincing words by means of which the mass is inclined to
accept a particular opinion or not to accept it.18 It is also not
politics, because politics is concerned with the administration of home
or city in accordance with ethical and philosophical requirements, for
the purpose of directing the mass toward a behavior that will result in
the preservation and permanence of the (human) species.

The subject here
is different from that of these two disciplines which, however, are
often similar to it. In a way, it is an entirely original science. In
fact, I have not come across a discussion along these lines by anyone. I
do not know if this is because people have been unaware of it, but there
is no reason to suspect them (of having been unaware of it). Perhaps
they have written exhaustively on this topic, and their work did not
reach us.19 There are many sciences. There have been numerous sages among
the nations of mankind. The knowledge that has not come down to us is
larger than the knowledge that has. Where are the sciences of the
Persians that 'Umar ordered wiped out at the time of the conquest!20Where are the
sciences of the Chaldaeans, the Syrians, and the Babylonians, and the
scholarly products and results that were theirs! Where are the sciences
of the Copts, their predecessors! The sciences of only one nation, the
Greek, have come down to us, because they were translated through al-Ma'mun's
efforts. (His efforts in this direction) were successful,
because he had many translators at his disposal and spent
much money in this connection. Of the sciences of
others, nothing has come to our attention.

The accidents involved in every manifestation of nature
and intellect deserve study. Any topic that is understandable and real
requires its own special science. In this connection, scholars seem to
have been interested (mainly) in the results (of the individual
sciences). As far as the subject under discussion is concerned, the
result, as we have seen, is just historical information. Although the
problems it raises are important, both essentially and specifically,
(exclusive concern for it) leads to one result only: the mere
verification of historical information. This is not much. Therefore,
scholars might have avoided the subject.

In the field under consideration here, we encounter (certain)
problems, treated incidentally by scholars among the arguments
applicable to their particular sciences, but that in object and approach
are of the same type as the problems (we are discussing). In connection
with the arguments for prophecy, for instance, scholars mention that
human beings co­operate with each other for their existence and,
therefore, need men to arbitrate among them and exercise a restraining
influence.22Or,
in the science of the principles of jurisprudence, in the chapter of
arguments for the necessity of languages, mention is made of the fact
that people need means to express their intentions because by their very
nature, co­operation and social organization are made easier by proper
expressions 23
Or, in connection with the explanation that laws have their reason in
the purposes they are to serve, the jurists mention that adultery
confuses pedigrees and destroys the (human) species; that murder, too,
destroys the human species; that injustice invites the destruction of
civilization with the necessary consequence that the (human) species
will be destroyed.24
Other similar things are stated in connection with the purposes embedded
in laws. All (laws) are based upon the effort to preserve civilization.
Therefore, (the laws) pay attention to the things that belong to
civilization. This is obvious from our references to these problems
which are mentioned as representative (of the general situation).

We also find a few of the problems of the subject under
discussion (treated) in scattered statements by the sages of mankind.
However, they did not exhaust the subject. For instance, we have the
speech of the Mobedhan before Bahram b. Bahram in the story of the owl
reported by al-Mas'udi 25 It runs: "O king, the might of
royal authority materializes only through the ' religious law, obedience
toward God, and compliance with His commands and prohibitions. The
religious law persists only through royal authority. Mighty royal
authority is accomplished only through men. Men persist only with the
help of property. The only way to property is through cultivation.26
The only way to cultivation is through justice. Justice is a balance set
up among mankind. The Lord set it up and appointed an overseer for it,
and that (overseer) is the ruler."

There also is a statement by Anosharwan 27to
the same effect: "Royal authority exists through the army, the army
through money, money through taxes, taxes through cultivation,
cultivation through justice, justice through the improvement of
officials, the improvement of officials through the forthrightness of
wazirs, and the whole thing in the first place through the ruler's
personal supervision of his subjects' condition and his ability to
educate them, so that he may rule them, and not they him."

In the Book on Politics that is ascribed to
Aristotle and has wide circulation, we find a good deal about (the
subject which is under discussion here). (The treatment,) however, is
not exhaustive, nor is the topic provided with all the argu­ments it
deserves, and it is mixed with other things. In the book, (the author)
referred to such general (ideas) 28as we have reported on
the authority of the Mobedhan and Anosharwan. He arranged his statement
in a remarkable circle that he discussed at length. It runs as follows:
29"The world is a garden the fence of which is the dynasty.
The dynasty is an authority through which life is given to proper
behavior. Proper behavior is a policy directed by the ruler. The ruler
is an institution supported by the soldiers. The soldiers are helpers
who are maintained by money. Money is sustenance brought together by the
subjects. The subjects are servants who are protected by justice.
Justice is something familiar,30 and through it, the world
persists. The world is a garden ...", and then it begins again from the
beginning. These are eight sentences of political wisdom. They are
connected with each other, the end of each one leading into the
beginning of the next. They are held together in a circle with no
definite beginning or end. (The author) was proud of what he had hit
upon and made much of the significance of the sentences.

When our discussion in the section on royal authority and
dynasties 31has been studied and due critical
attention given to it, it will be found to constitute an exhaustive,
very clear, fully substantiated interpretation and detailed exposition
of these sentences. We became aware of these things with God's help and
without the instruction of Aristotle or the teaching of the Mobedhan.

The statements of Ibn al-Muqaffa32
and the excursions on political subjects in his treatises also touch
upon many of the problems of our work. However, (Ibn al-Muqaffa`) did
not substantiate his statements with arguments as we have done. He
merely mentioned them in passing in the (flowing) prose style and
eloquent verbiage of the rhetorician.

Judge Abu Bakr at-Turtushi33also had
the same idea in the Kitab Siraj al-Muluk.
He divided the work into chapters that come close to the chapters and
problems of our work. However, he did not achieve his aim or realize his
intention. He did not exhaust the problems and did not bring clear
proofs. He sets aside a special chapter for a particular prob­lem, but
then he tells a great number of stories and traditions and he reports
scattered remarks by Persian sages such as Buzurjmihr34and the Mobedhan, and by Indian sages, as well as material
transmitted on the authority of Daniel, Hermes, and other great men. He
does not verify his statements or clarify them with the help of natural
arguments. The work is merely a compilation of transmitted material
similar to sermons in its inspirational purpose. In a way, at-Turtushi
aimed at the right idea, but did not hit it. He did not realize his
intention or exhaust his problems.

We, on the other hand, were inspired by God. He led us to
a science whose truth we ruthlessly set forth.35 If I have
succeeded in presenting the problems of (this science) ex­haustively and
in showing how it differs in its various aspects and characteristics
from all other crafts, this is due to divine guidance. If, on the other
hand, I have omitted some point, or if the problems of (this science)
have got confused with something else, the task of correcting remains
for the discerning critic, but the merit is mine since I cleared and
marked the way.

In 37this book, now, we are going to explain such various
aspects of civilization that affect human beings in their social
organization, as royal authority, gainful occupation, sciences, and
crafts, (all) in the light of various arguments that will show the true
nature of the varied knowledge of the elite and the common people, repel
misgivings, and remove doubts. We say that man is distinguished from the
other living beings by certain qualities peculiar to him, namely: (1)
The sciences and crafts which result from that ability to think which
distinguishes man from the other animals and exalts him as a thinking
being over all creatures.38 (2)
The need for restraining influence and strong authority, since man,
alone of all the animals, cannot exist without them. It is true,
something has been said (in this connection about bees and locusts.
However, if they have something similar, it comes to them through
inspiration,39
not through thinking or reflection. (3)
Man's efforts to make a living and his concern with the various ways of
obtaining and acquiring the means of (life). This is the result of man's
need for food to keep alive and subsist, which God instilled in him,
guiding him to desire and seek a livelihood. God said: "He gave every
thing its natural characteristics, and then guided it." 40(4)Civilization. This means that human beings have to dwell
in common and settle together in cities and hamlets for the comforts of
companionship and for the satisfaction of human needs, as a result of
the natural disposition of human beings toward co-operation in order to
be able to make a living, as we shall explain. Civilization may be
either desert (Bedouin) civilization as found in outlying regions and
mountains, in hamlets (near suitable) pastures in waste regions, and on
the fringes of sandy deserts. Or it may be sedentary civilization as
found in cities, villages, towns, and small communities that serve the
purpose of protection and fortifi­cation by means of walls. In all these
different conditions, there are things that affect civilization
essentially in as far as it is social organization.

Consequently,41 the discussion in this work
falls naturally under six chapter headings:

(1)On human civilization in
general, its various kinds, and the portion of the earth that is
civilized.

(2)On desert civilization,
including a report on the tribes and savage nations.

(3)On dynasties, the
caliphate, and royal authority, including a discussion of government
ranks.

(4)On sedentary
civilization, countries, and cities.

(5)On crafts, ways of making
a living, gainfuloccupations,
and their various aspects. And

(6)On the sciences, their
acquisition and study.

I have discussed desert civilization first, because it
is prior to everything else, as will become clear later on. (The
discussion of) royal authority was placed before that of coun­tries and
cities for the same reason. (The discussion of) ways of making a living
was placed before that of the sciences, because making a living is
necessary and natural, whereas the study of science is a luxury or
convenience.42 Anything natural has precedence over luxury. I
lumped the crafts together with gainful occupations, because they
belong to the latter in some respects as far as civilization is
concerned, as will become clear later.